Over the last few weeks, there has been broad discussion about the Straight Takeover of April 1969. The Straight Takeover was a protest by Cornell’s Afro-American Society (AAS) against the treatment of black students on campus, and April 19 will mark the 40th anniversary of the Takeover. The AAS students occupied the Straight for two days before ceremoniously emerging from the building armed as the Takeover officially ended. This is the source of the famous award-winning photograph of Eric Evans, a member of AAS, walking out of the Straight with a gun.

I have read many different accounts of the Takeover by former students, faculty and even current students at Cornell. My conclusion is that in the 40 years since the Takeover, misinformation regarding the history of this event has been molded into fact. For one, it has been reported that the black students who occupied the Straight entered the building with guns, intent on violently getting their demands met. The reality behind the guns is that after Delta Upsilon, a white fraternity, decided to enter the Straight in an attempt to forcefully expel blacks from the building, the guns were brought in by Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) — who were largely white — and given to AAS members as a means for self-defense against those whites who actually threatened the AAS members. This leads to another common misconception that blacks were alone in their involvement in this protest. The AAS had widespread support on the outside from students and in the Ithaca community. To be sure, there was intense opposition as well.

Now, why are these little details important? One has to understand that behind all of this discussion of whether the protest was violent in nature or not, the real purpose behind the protest gets lost. It has been documented (most recently in the Cornell Alumni Magazine) that black students felt unwelcome and uncomfortable on campus. One interviewee in the magazine states that he remembers “incidents where black girls were doing their hair in the dorm and the police being called because people thought they were smoking marijuana.” Some black alumni have said this was actually a malicious prank by white girls in the dorms. However, the point is that incidents like this (and there were plenty of other racially hostile incidents like this) did not make Cornell — even at the very least — a safe-haven for black students. Black students on campus experienced the same racism on campus that they did in society at large.

This brings us back to our contemporary discussion. We do not seem to advance conversation beyond talk about the black man with the gun. In today’s discussion, all conversation and content is about that photo and its implications. Why is it so controversial? Because in 2009, just like in 1969, an image of a black man with a gun is threatening, and more importantly, is powerful. It brings back the memory of black power. It is not acceptable in this society for a black man to hold a gun, and it never has been; it undermines the concept of white supremacy, countering with the notion of Black Power in the face of inequality. This is the history and the legacy behind The Takeover for those who opposed black freedom and inequality. For them, The Takeover had nothing to do with a history of white privilege, but more to do with the emergence of an argument for — a demand — for equality in this institution. An unsettling notion to say the least.

So when I read The Sun’s attempt to document the history of The Takeover, all I have seen so far is this history in the eyes of former white students and current white students, when the movement centrally involved black students and had to do with the treatment of black students. I’ve read a column by a seemingly conservative white student explaining what is and isn’t acceptable protest (as if a conservative white student in this era would know about the interests of the black community in the 1960s and the means to attain those objectives), and why The Takeover should not be celebrated.

The whitewashing of history has effectively put the blame for the events of 1969 on the black students involved, and thus ignores the purpose of The Takeover. This deflection of accountability is made in an effort to absolve a largely white institution of its past and present problems. What has already been forgotten is the stabbing of a black man on Cornell’s campus by a white student only three years ago. How would history have remembered this situation? And who would have the accountability for such a hate crime? Is it black people, white people or the institution?

On April 19, 2009, The Takeover of 40 years ago will be remembered. What has been lost in this discussion is what The Takeover did for the Cornell community and the Ithaca community. Many have failed to mention that The Takeover opened the door for diversity on this campus. The Takeover gave the black community a voice and guaranteed their continued presence at Cornell, but it also enabled other students of color to have a place here. The Takeover also built on a foundation of solidarity between black students on campus and the black community in Ithaca by making staff positions more available to blacks.

But history has misremembered these results of The Takeover and instead chosen to remember the black man with the gun. The whitewashing of history should be attributed to an ideological stance that is against equality. And revisionist history of such a momentous occasion cannot be allowed. The Takeover was the single most glorious success for people of color in the history of Cornell’s existence, and for it to be remembered any differently than this is an attempt to whitewash history.